Digital BW, The Print

Brooks, 
I for one would like to thank you for the detailed and informative note you posted.  Your sincerity and passion show through clearly.  

I also like your magazine and have a copy beside me that I look at from time to time. Your articles and the published images are refreshing.  I hope you can find time to visit this forum again and share some more. 

Steadman Uhlich
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: lensworkpub@... 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 12:13 PM
  Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Lenswork Special Editions


  I have just discovered your group and hope you don't mind my adding a 
  bit to the conversation.
  Martin, thanks for the kind words about our magazine!
  Yes, we do use digital negatives in our process of making the 
  LensWork Special Editions prints. I have been very candid about this 
  and discussed it in length both in the magazine (LensWork #23, page 
  11) and in an article on our website called "An Alternative to the 
  Gallery System" posted at http://www.lenswork.com/lwsarticle2.htm. 
  There I outline the use of the computer and our digital component. 
  Our method is somewhat different than Dan Burkholder's method. In 
  fact, Dan and I taught a workshop together demonstrating the 
  differences in approach and results. We may do so again! Dan's work 
  is stunning and perfectly appropriate for his platinum prints. His 
  method, however, doesn't work as well for silver prints due to the 
  higher resolution of silver paper and the inherent problems with a 
  stochastic screen. I pioneered a different technique that is, quite 
  simply, better for silver, simpler and faster. We use 425-line screen 
  negatives from an Agfa Avantra 44 image setter created from an 
  Acrobat file. I am happy to share more details if you are interested. 
  We have no secrets. We even published our transfer curve in Dan's 
  second edition book.
  I believe that the digital darkroom is the greatest tool to come to 
  photography since the positive/negative process. It is more important 
  than any other great invention in photography -- more important than 
  roll film, more important than the Zone System, more important than 
  the electronic shutter or the handheld camera. My personal work is 
  now almost all digital in the creative phases and only "analog" when 
  I print my digital negatives on silver paper. At this point I don't 
  use an ink-jet printer. I will in time. I have no doubt that the 
  technology will continue to improve and issues of permanency, 
  acceptance in the marketplace, and scale will be resolved in the 
  favor of technolgy. There will be those (mostly people with a 
  financial interest to protect) who will resist this evolution. I 
  understand this. But their protests will seem siller and sillier as 
  time goes on.
  In fact, I would love it if digital technology became the new 
  paradigm for fine art photography because I believe in it so 
  strongly. I've taken a considerable amount of heat from some of my 
  fellow photographers because of our pricing philosophy, but I feel 
  strongly that one of the best benefits of this digital evolution (as 
  well as mechanical digital prints from ink-jet printers) is the 
  possibility that fine art photography can become affordable again to 
  everyone. I am much more interested in the changes in DISTRIBUTION 
  that will be developed from digital technologies than I am changes in 
  CREATIVITY, though both will be profoundly impacted by these 
  technologies.
  As to the photogravures, our printer is Russ Dodd and he is, 
  unequivocally, the best photogravure printer in the world. I have 
  seen Strange Ross' work and it simply does not compare. I've 
  seen "the best" photogravures in the world both historically and from 
  contemporary photogravure printers and I am here to tell you that 
  Russ Dodd's photogravures are simply better, richer, more subtle and 
  refined. And yes, he is using a variation on the digital negative 
  technique. Why? Because digital negatives are the solution to so many 
  of photography's technical problems. I am convinced that we will look 
  back on traditional enlarger-based printing techniques as a quaint, 
  but primitive methodology.
  As to our website that emphasizes that our Special Editions are not 
  ink-jet prints, we do so to limit confusion. Our pricing strategy has 
  created confusion and folks tend automatically to assume our prints 
  are ink-jet prints from a printer or they couldn't be so cheap. 
  (There is a lot of education required here -- as most of you probably 
  know. It takes a long time and a great deal of technical skill to 
  make a good ink-jet print and that they are so disparaged in the 
  marketplace is a shame.) We hear this from folks all the time. In 
  fact, it's kind of a joke around here. People will stop by our 
  gallery and ask, "How do you make these prints?" We tell them they 
  are gelatin silver prints printed from a digital master negative 
  created from a scan of the master print. The silver photographic 
  paper is then processed in a traditional wet darkroom using 
  traditional photographic paper and chemistry, process to museum 
  archival standards, selenium toned and finished by hand. They will 
  then often ask, without blinking, "So which Epson printer are you 
  using?" We've heard this exchange so many times we have learned that 
  it is important for us to emphasize and then repeat that our prints 
  are traditional gelatin silver photographic paper, over and over 
  again until they get it. 
  I think this illustrates a fundamental shift in our world. For 
  decades now the education required when communicating to a potential 
  buyer of a photograph was centered on the photographer and their 
  importance as a "personality." Comments about the process or the 
  medium were almost non-existent. Now, with all the variations in 
  production methods, the challenge to educate consumers will separate 
  the good galleries from the bad, the good websites from the bad, and 
  the reputable producers from the bad. As ditital artists, those of 
  you on this forum had best be prepared for the coming backlash as the 
  first crop of digital prints begin to fade and turn blue on people's 
  walls. It pains me to say it, but there are some digital artists out 
  there who have been selling early digital prints now without full 
  disclosure to the buyers and I fear there is a time bomb of bad PR 
  headed our way.
  That is why this forum and others like it are so important. In short, 
  you guys on this forum are right and I just wanted to let you know 
  that I am firmly on your side!
  Brooks Jensen
  Editor, LensWork Publishing




        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]